Query Why More Are 'Involved' In Solving Dallas Than 911 - Here & Most Political Forums

[Peter Lemkin]

I'm just curious and asking [though I may through in some of my own ideas, analysis and prejudices] why it is that so many [relatively] are feverishly interested and/or exploring the JFK Assassination mysteries and fewer who tackle at a comparable level the issues and contradictions around the events of 9-11 and related events [such as the Anthrax attacks, first WTC bombing, Oklahoma bombing et al. - which many, including myself feel are directly related to 911].

Is it that JFK came first?
Is it that JFK is the death of a significant person, politician and the extinction of him and his path for America?
Is it that the very size of the 911 event is daunting?
Is it that more background work, more documentation, more witnesses seem to be available for Dallas?
Is it that more are confused or convinced by some or all of the official version of 911 compared to the official version of Dallas?
Is it that persons sense greater danger in deeply exploring 911 at this time, compared to the 50 year-old cold-case in Dallas?
Is the cognitive dissonance of the implications of 911 [if it was false-flag] greater than the cognitive dissonance of the implications of a false-flag Dallas?
Is it something[s] other?

I realize that specialized sites dedicated to 911 are full of interested persons and researchers, but have long felt that many who seem to 'get' how the intelligence services; propaganda machinery; deep political state work are more inclined [or interested] in devoting energy to Dallas than to 911 - which is more recent and IMHO more likely to produce a change in the average American/World mind - to effect change in society despite their being of equal ethical value and abhorrence. When I was at the EF posting actively, Simkin was [until the last ugly scene] a good friend - on and off the Forum. He very much liked my thoughts and research on JFK, but was somewhat annoyed at my postings on 911 [my feelings, with some evidence]. Just one example of so many. So, there are some conspiracies some will embrace and others that are a reach of '[il]logic' too far for them. While I have my own limits, I find substantial and convincing evidence for both a massive conspiracy and false-flag in Dallas and in 911, and even some connections between the two, as well as many operations temporaly between them.

[David Guyatt]

It's a question I, too, have asked. For me it seems back to front. I would've thought that 9/11 would be the primary research subject with JFK well in second place.

I do wonder if it is fear. Killing one man, even a president, is not unusual from the perspective of history. But 9/11 was altogether a "bigger", more audacious and, it has to be said, more heartless event. Dealing with that mentally and emotionally, means you have to step away from everything you've learned about life, your nation and your government, and thus everything you hold true.

In the last analysis I think people are scared.

[Peter Lemkin]

It's a question I, too, have asked. For me it seems back to front. I would've thought that 9/11 would be the primary research subject with JFK well in second place.

I do wonder if it is fear. Killing one man, even a president, is not unusual from the perspective of history. But 9/11 was altogether a "bigger", more audacious and, it has to be said, more heartless event. Dealing with that mentally and emotionally, means you have to step away from everything you've learned about life, your nation and your government, and thus everything you hold true.

In the last analysis I think people are scared.

The danger level is hard to 'meter'.....I can point to those investigating, witness to, or whistleblowers for either that have met with highly suspicious and untimely deaths or other great troubles in their lives. I think, so far many more died or were 'troubled' in the JFK case than so far with 911. Of course the death toll was much higher and the crime immensely larger with 911 - and was used to bring about a permanent state of fear and burgeoning police state. A complete understanding of either [IMHO] will leave one with the exact same analysis of who's in real control; who has no control; that the 'governance and polity structures' are but false facades behind which lurks a very menacing deep Political 'octopus'. That said, i can see where 911 more immediately makes one forced to reject the total structure - as it appears that many more persons, entities, agencies, media were involved in some way [with or without their direct complicity before-the-fact]. Personally, I've totally lost faith in the 'system' and in its ability to ever correct its course or investigate and repair itself. It is constructed to appear to do that, BUT NOT TO DO ANY SUCH THING.

Personally, while still very much interested and involved in JFK's assassination and getting out 'out' to the Public in usable [actionable] ways, I'm fairly convinced that proof of the official version of 911 being a Big Lie [which most suspect, but are confused as to what did happen!] had the greater leverage power to make changes internally/externally. It was a huge event and its very complexity is daunting - but great progress has already been made to show the official version is a knowing fraud.....ditto Dallas.

[Magda Hassan]

Some people can only take on so much too. Doing specialised research is time, energy and resource intensive and some times very expensive. Jack of all trades master of none sort of thing too. Not all of us can be renaissance men or women. I suppose personal interest has some thing to do with it too. And perhaps because JFK happened before 911 people have been at that one longer and have invested so much of themselves in it it is a big ask to take on another major event. Not that your are but I hope you get my drift. Personally I tend to go for the big picture brush strokes of where, when and how the Empire goes around the world including the negative template. I am interested in both JFK and 911 but not exclusively in either nor at the expense of other events less known.

[R.K. Locke]

There's a surprising number of people who know that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy and yet dismiss outright the notion that 9/11 could be the result of similar high-level collaboration and malfeasance.

How the cognitive dissonance involved in this kind of thinking evades them I'll never know. I suppose it's part of a curious mindset wherein arbitrary ethical lines are drawn as to what "they" will or won't do; i.e. "Oh, they would do X but they would never do Y."

Well, I think we all know by now that there is nothing that "they" wouldn't do.

[Anthony Thorne]

Late at night so I can't do justice to the (very good) initial query, but I recall being deeply annoyed when reading a concluding page in one of the Doug Horne INSIDE THE AARB volumes - Horne brings in some typical 9/11 truther bashing and notes for the reader how (paraphrasing) 'most legitimate JFK researchers do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job, or that the towers were felled through controlled demolition'. And I sat there and ran through all the various key JFK researchers I could think of who had written books or who were well-respected, and big surprise, most of them - contrary to Horne's assertion - were outspoken believers in a 9/11 conspiracy.

As others have suggested, there is some distance to the JFK assassination, whereas 9/11 is still an ongoing event and many of the perps, their front companies and handlers are still making their presence known in the daily paper up to today.

[Dawn Meredith]

There's a surprising number of people who know that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy and yet dismiss outright the notion that 9/11 could be the result of similar high-level collaboration and malfeasance.

How the cognitive dissonance involved in this kind of thinking evades them I'll never know. I suppose it's part of a curious mindset wherein arbitrary ethical lines are drawn as to what "they" will or won't do; i.e. "Oh, they would do X but they would never do Y."

Well, I think we all know by now that there is nothing that "they" wouldn't do.

This is what I have observed as well. I think people can smell the lie of JFK but when it comes to 9-11 most won't go there. And even when shown evidence will demand more. An old friend of mine who was a JFK researcher for years back in the day- Part of the Assassination Information Bureau- tells me "explain how it happened". In that we can explain how it happened with JFK so ergo we must do the same with 9-11. I try to get him and others to see that it matters not that we cannot explain what happened, (many theories) but all people need to do is understand what did not happen. The transparent cover story dished out by the government and media. Peter I think you might be surprised if you saw on facebook just how many are involved in the 9-11 truth movement. Posting there has replaced forums, sadly. I do both. And there is also a group for just about every profession. Including Lawyers for 9-11 truth.
Finally, the work on the JFK assassination began 50 years ago. So give it time. More are waking up to the truth of 9-11.
Dawn

[Marlene Zenker]

There's a surprising number of people who know that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy and yet dismiss outright the notion that 9/11 could be the result of similar high-level collaboration and malfeasance.

How the cognitive dissonance involved in this kind of thinking evades them I'll never know. I suppose it's part of a curious mindset wherein arbitrary ethical lines are drawn as to what "they" will or won't do; i.e. "Oh, they would do X but they would never do Y."

Well, I think we all know by now that there is nothing that "they" wouldn't do.

This is what I have observed as well. I think people can smell the lie of JFK but when it comes to 9-11 most won't go there. And even when shown evidence will demand more. An old friend of mine who was a JFK researcher for years back in the day- Part of the Assassination Information Bureau- tells me "explain how it happened". In that we can explain how it happened with JFK so ergo we must do the same with 9-11. I try to get him and others to see that it matters not that we cannot explain what happened, (many theories) but all people need to do is understand what did not happen. The transparent cover story dished out by the government and media. Peter I think you might be surprised if you saw on facebook just how many are involved in the 9-11 truth movement. Posting there has replaced forums, sadly. I do both. And there is also a group for just about every profession. Including Lawyers for 9-11 truth.
Finally, the work on the JFK assassination began 50 years ago. So give it time. More are waking up to the truth of 9-11.
Dawn

My opinion, JFK is 50 years ago, easier for people to ascribe bad things to an event in the past, fear is definitely a factor and not giving a shit has something to do with it to.

A few days after 9/11 (air traffic was still suspended) I was at a dinner at a friends house, I told them that I had read a piece by Greg Palast that said that the gov't. had flown Saudis out of the US. A friend said that he could never believe that because then he wouldn't be able to live here anymore. A couple of years later when he learned that the Saudis were flown out he apologized to me for being so naive.

Another friend and I were discussing 9/11 in 2004 and he said he didn't think the government was involved but didn't believe that a plane hit the Pentagon! I just looked at him...

[Malcolm Pryce]

Is it really true? Perhaps in the words of Simon & Garfunkel, a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest. Personally, I have noticed more 9/11 stuff, and that might be because 9/11 was my introductory red pill moment.


But say it is true. There are a number of possible reasons.


For one, we all know how frequently our DPF take on life meets with contempt, ridicule, hostility etc. These are essentially psychological defence mechanisms. Mockery is often disguised fear and people don't like it when you undermine the sacred truths they have been fed all their lives about how we are led by the men in white hats.


That being the case, 9/11 due to its magnitude strikes me as a far greater threat. Setting aside the JFK cover-up, the actual event is not such a terrible existential threat - a rogue cabal with some rifles shot a man.


But 9/11 appears to involve so much more. Pre-wiring the Towers for demolition? Total collusion by the media? No plane at the Pentagon? No plane at Shanksville? Entire US Air Defence seemingly compromised?


Is it any wonder the mockers can't accept that?


There is also another possible reason too. Forgive me, but the JFK conspiracy theory' just seems somehow more glamorous, doesn't it? Old movies always look more appealing, and the Zapruder film is an old movie now. And of course that was when the world lost its virginity. Nowadays, with all the evil that has since been exposed, the world is more of a street walker on crack.

[Peter Lemkin]

Is it really true? Perhaps in the words of Simon & Garfunkel, a man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest. Personally, I have noticed more 9/11 stuff, and that might be because 9/11 was my introductory red pill moment.


But say it is true. There are a number of possible reasons.


For one, we all know how frequently our DPF take on life meets with contempt, ridicule, hostility etc. These are essentially psychological defence mechanisms. Mockery is often disguised fear and people don't like it when you undermine the sacred truths they have been fed all their lives about how we are led by the men in white hats.


That being the case, 9/11 due to its magnitude strikes me as a far greater threat. Setting aside the JFK cover-up, the actual event is not such a terrible existential threat - a rogue cabal with some rifles shot a man.


But 9/11 appears to involve so much more. Pre-wiring the Towers for demolition? Total collusion by the media? No plane at the Pentagon? No plane at Shanksville? Entire US Air Defence seemingly compromised?


Is it any wonder the mockers can't accept that?


There is also another possible reason too. Forgive me, but the JFK conspiracy theory' just seems somehow more glamorous, doesn't it? Old movies always look more appealing, and the Zapruder film is an old movie now. And of course that was when the world lost its virginity. Nowadays, with all the evil that has since been exposed, the world is more of a street walker on crack.

I have only one problem with you comments above. JFK was not a 'rogue cabal with some rifles' - it was the basic power structure behind the government - just as in 911. Investigation of either leads to the same structures and mechanisms of deception/control/propaganda/undemocratic structures/secret government. The 'cabal' that planned it and covered it up did not handle the rifles or pose as SS agents in the crowd to protect them. Those were expert technicians, called 'mechanics'.